Todo Tiene Su Como-Se-Llama

Here's my question to you, then:
If we shouldn't be concerned about fantasy as a general genre (completely agree), or even Harry Potter specifically (agree), should we still be concerned about Pullman? He's made no deception of his intention, which is, as I recall his words, to "kill God in the hearts and minds of children", or something similar.
Should we encourage kids to read it at all? If so, at what age? Can we, knowing his intents and views, still buy these books, and essentially give money to this cause? Wouldn't the library work just as well? And should we even go see the movie? I realize some of this is in the same vein as the old "meat sacrificed to idols" type of argument...but then again, not quite...
(Also, watch for my comment to your comment on my recent post.)

Legitimate questions . . . I think some of what you're asking was answered by Overstreet in the Q&A. Namely, it's always important to be discerning and to teach discernment, but not to condemn or get hysterical, etc.

As for what I think: I don't believe we should be particularly concerned about Pullman, anymore than I'm concerned by Richard Dawkins (for example). If their criticisms are legitimate (and some are) then playing to their stereotype should be the last thing we want to do, and if they're way off base (as I believe they ultimately are) nothing will prove it faster than a free and open discussion of what they have to say. This is the corner they've boxed themselves into, and I'd love to see them really backed into that wall.

As for "the children," no, I wouldn't be encouraging them to read The Golden Compass. There are too many other REALLY good books out there . . . I have lists and lists of them. To be perfectly honest, I've never read His Dark Materials, mainly because I read another book by Pullman awhile back and was heartily bored by it, so I never got around to his fantasy stuff. However, if "the children" were to stumble upon it in their own right (as kids who read are wont to do), the farthest thing from my mind would be to grant it the undying fascination of being "the forbidden book."

As far as the question of age, in my experience (as a somewhat precocious reader), children who are unable to learn discernment through thoughtful discussions with the right person about a potentially problematic work are also unlikely to be able to read it cover to cover. When they read it, if at all, the time will be right as long as the right person is there to talk to them about it, and the age will vary widely.

On a side-note, while I'm perfectly willing to discuss "the children" in the abstract, I don't think they should really have a central role in a discussion between people who have no children to worry about. I think the little buggers are invoked quite enough already by their parents as a sort of irrelevant trump card of doom.

In answer to your final queries, yes, of course the library is a perfectly acceptable, even ideal way to check out His Dark Materials for oneself. When I was a kid living in a foreign country, I bought a large number of the books I read sight-unseen simply because I couldn't get them any other way. Now that I live with easy access to libraries and bookstores where I may browse at my leisure, I tend to only buy books from series and authors I've already enjoyed while sampling the rest for free. This case would certainly be no exception, and if I didn't really really like The Golden Compass (assuming I read it someday) you wouldn't catch me shelling out for the trilogy.

The movie is a bit of a different animal, I believe. Pullman has no screenwriting credit, and as far as I know he's been paid for his work. I don't think buying a movie ticket will put money in his pocket . . . It might ensure sequels, but there, too, I suspect that New Line already bought the rights to the whole trilogy when the first movie went into production. They'd be rather stupid not to. Either way, if indications are that the movie is truly terrible I'll probably avoid (except possibly to review it myself, and as an excuse to not have to read the book). If indications are that it's a great fantasy movie, I'll definitely be seeing it. We could go back and forth about objectionable content, but I really don't think mere philosophical disagreement should have a significant role to play in the decision.

I went to see the movie on Saturday with some friends from church, of all places. :p It was, in a word, decent. The acting wasn't fantastic, although I thought the little girl (Dakota Something-or-other) did a surprisingly good job. I was disappointed about how little screen time Daniel Craig received. :(

Having not read the books, it took me awhile to find and understand the movie's rhythm--especially in regard to the animal companions called demons. It felt like it was trying to reach the epic level of LOTR, but it fell terribly short. The characters lack the depth of Tolkien's, and the plot's movements felt forced, not fluid. There was, however, a kick-butt ice bear fight. That was (sadly) probably my favorite part of the whole movie.

In response to the controversy--since I haven't read the books, I can't comment on that. As far as the movie goes, if the anti-God message is there, it isn't terribly strong. Yes, the Magisterium could be construed as modern religion, trying to blind the eyes of our children and force everyone to "believe" the same thing. But at the same time, the message of the movie is just vague enough that it could be taken a different way--the Magisterium, which separates children from their demons--their "souls"--essentially mortally injures the children. The soul, then, the magical, spiritual side of humanity, is what makes the children (and all humans) complete.

That might be stretching things a bit, but if the things Pullman himself says about his books are true, I don't think the movie remains as true to his sentiments.

Bottom line: wait for the dvd.